If you are fed up of the WOHM vs SAHM debate (I know I am) DO NOT open the News Review bit of the Sunday Times....

[foxinsocks]

just don't do it

Why DO sahms get so angry, bitter and defensive..? For God's sake DWs piece was a rather amusing, wittily written everyday observation....but there was an element of truth behind it. Raising children does not take up your every waking moment.....what to do with the bits that the children don't actually ' need ' ? or frankly some of the tasks they do need done for them but are not very interesting or rewarding for adults ? Personally I pay someone else to do them,( an excellent, and very well qualified person too ), because she is better at them than me.I do not think my children mind,( as to ' suffering '...what tosh ! ), and I do not mind either.With the rest of my time I work, outside of the home, for reward,( some of which is a very reasonable salary, thank you ), and I think for the good of society too.
sahms are no different to me. I challenge anyone to honestly say they are, a) good at everything in relation to raising a child, and , b) that it takes up all their time, or even a reasonable amount...The question is what else do they do ? Genuine answers on a postcard...

mozhe - actually looking after a three year old and a one year old takes up quite a bit of my time as it happens. how much of your day would you have free
I also do a lot of voluntary work (for free thank you very much) and I also keep the house going.
It's not rocket science, As it happens I am not particularly bitter I just get exasperated at ludicrous stereotyping and generalisations.
and - as an aside - I did work full time for a while when dd1 was small. compared to being a SAHM it was a walk in park much less tiring and much less like hard work.
just my personal perspective of course.

I only stopped working full time in August when I realised that my DTs were growing up quickly and I was missing out on alot of it. They are the only children I have and the only ones I intend to have. I have chosen to be at home with them until they start school in a couple of years. There is nothing bitter or defensive about this decision, I am perfectly happy with it, although I find it far more exhausting than teaching teenagers full time!

I think some people are confusing work with life...
Madame Platypus - no, the suffagrettes chained themselves to railings so that women would have the very important right to use their family connections to persuade national newspapers to overlook their mediocre writing talents to allow them to write grubby little half baked articles making massive assumptions and slagging off other women and their choices.
Emily Davison would be proud.

"Raising a child does not take up most of your time"? Er, in what parallel universe is this? Yes, if both children are at school you theoretically have roughly 9.15 to 3.15 'free' during term times, but if you have babies or pre-schoolers, then yes, actually, they do take up every waking minute until they go to bed. You need to watch them, feed them, cuddle them, talk to them and basically keep them alive. Funny that.
And if you hired someone to look after your children who asked if they could also do a part time job at the same time, would you say yes?
I'm all for women working. Think it is a splendid idea. But to pretend children don't need looking after is plain daft.

Bibliophile, you do not need to ' watch ' a child surely ! I have never heard of anything that smacks so much of the very over parenting D.W was ' tongue in cheek ' referring to ! Your child,( the whole age range...), needs to be allowed to get on with his own life too...My DDsX2, aged 6 months often keep me company whilst I work on papers/read books/cook/walk dog/talk on phone...likewise I keep them company whilst they chew toys/babble/take in the universe...

Yes, of course you need to watch babies and toddlers. Even animals watch their young, who are far less vulnerable than ours. Or do you just go to work and leave yours at home, as they are so robust and need to 'get on with their own lives'?

mozhe, after a certain age, looking after children doesn't take up all your time but unfortunately for many workers, work does.

And as children still need looking after for some of the time and most workplaces do not offer hours of working which enable that looking after to be done, many parents (mostly women) choose to opt out of the cash economy for a while.

If more flexible work was available and it was work which actually required you to use your skills, the choices many women make might be different. But blaming women for the fact that we organise society to ignore the fact that children need looking after, is just lazy and tiresome. And not something anyone really intelligent would do imo.

Well said, Caligula.

A belated pmsl for Sobernow's comments about Brideshead and the Waughs!

mozhe, instead of boasting about how you can do paperwork while looking after two immobile, silent 6 mths olds why don't you come back in a year and tell me how much paperwork you get done with two walking talking destructive tornados in the house. run along now, there's a good girl.

And unless you are Daisy Waugh there are precious few well-paid jobs that you can do solely while your children sleep or are at school. What on earth does she think she has in common with 99% of genuine working mothers?

and lets face it, whilst you're out at work, who is looking after your LOs? almost cetainly a badly paid poorly educated woman...yes, I think that's what the suffragettes were fighting for

PPh, there is a reason I'm sure why people get so vindictive and angry in relation to the SAHMvsWOHM debate, and I think it would be interesting to think about that...? In actual fact I also have DSsx3, and they are 3,4 and 5.5, they can also be incorporated into tasks and events that I need to do,( DS1 is a dab hand at helping me collate data with the help of a tick box template....he does it faster than my senior registrar !), as I can be into things they need and want to do. When he goes to school I go to work, a nanny also live and works in our family to do the bits of childrearing I don't want or need to do.It is about running simultaneous strands of your life together I think.

oh LOL Mozhe, you are making me pmsl here.

So your dc's help with your work do they? Well my DD's idea of help is to go through all my files and throw them all over the office and then put all the papers back in the wrong file. And DS's idea is to sit down and go on the Harry Potter site.

I expect it's just because I'm incompetent, as a mother and a worker. You must come round and show me what I'm doing wrong.

And er... in common with most of the population, I can't afford a nanny. I expect that's because we're all too lazy to go and get jobs with long hours and good salaries.

Darn, that's it, I should have taken a job which involved ticking boxes instead of drafting listing particulars.

I don't think any of my 4 children can even spell listing particulars. I think my nanny can though.

I don't hold any beef for SAHMdom or WOTHdom, having done an inordinate amount of the latter, flirted with the former and am about to go back to the latter I do actually realise that there are different decisions for different circumstances. But I wouldn't dare to stand here with my very high-paying professional qualifications, nanny and housekeeper and tell everyone on mumsnet that "it is all very easy to do if only you would get yourself organised". I just don't have the brass neck for that.

Haven't read the whole thread but would just like to add that Daisy Waugh's column really irritates me. The woman comes across as a complete idiot.

Her first column for them was complaining about the new car-seat law, saying it was ridiculous. I find it more ridiculous to have no regard for your childrens' safety.
'

LOL at brass neck

Do they do chimneys too, mohze?

My children aren't strands of my life. They're people. And if for any reason I had to spend 12 hours a day away from them, I probably wouldn't spend whatever precious short times I had with them employing them to do my menial admin jobs. But hey, we're all different. And being "economically active" is so much more important than anything else in life.

You have a live-in nanny? Jesus, you and Daisy Waugh make a lovely pair lecturing your inferiors about their inadequacies.

and are kids at school 70 hrs a week these days then? blimey, I only packed in teaching in the summer, I never worked a 70 hr week...

of course she has a live in nanny, she couldn't have 5 young children and a professional full time job any other way. which is fine, but don't then bloody set yourself up as "an example to you all" since for 90% of the country's population, that bears no resemblance to their lives!

"When he goes to school, I go to work" so you work 10am to 2.30pm and you have a live-in nanny? How lazy!

WBC, maybe if you tried giving DD a task you really needed done that was just a bit demanding, she would feel valued and motivated...and surprise you ? After all whoever heard of a 5 year old helping a consultant psychiatrist with her research ? Get it ? If you enjoyed ' Harry Potter ' with DS,( and I mean really put your heart and sol into it ),he might enjoy being involved in your world ? I call it ' thinkiing in the mind of my child '...I think your kids are trying to get your attention, and tell you something.
PPH,it isn't easy to do....it requires lots of lateral thinking,humour,determination etc.There are ups and downs. Of course havng a well paid job/nanny/household help/also being the boss all apply to me and they help, no doubt BUT so does my basic mental set.....work,parent,live and above all try to relax about it all.